On 6/20/07, Eelco Hillenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As you're on Wicket 1.2.6, use the portlet support that comes with
> that.
+1
> For 1.3 and onwards, you should be able to run any Wicket
> applications/ pages just as a portlets without further fuzzing around.
> At least, that's what Ate ha
> Does threads are very nice, but also very tangled to understand "What
> is the actual situation of Wicket & Portlet vs Currently
> Those-Techs-Users"!
>
> Would you mind breafing, at least, what should we do to secure-test
> and run our Wicket-Portleted application? I mean, should we move to
> W
Martijn,
Does threads are very nice, but also very tangled to understand "What
is the actual situation of Wicket & Portlet vs Currently
Those-Techs-Users"!
Would you mind breafing, at least, what should we do to secure-test
and run our Wicket-Portleted application? I mean, should we move to
Wick
http://www.nabble.com/forum/Search.jtp?forum=13974&local=y&query=portlet+support
On 6/20/07, manuel barzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Sirs,
>
> When we started using Wicket in our project one of the major
> motivation was its support for Portlet implementation.
>
> This week, we have migrate
Dear Sirs,
When we started using Wicket in our project one of the major
motivation was its support for Portlet implementation.
This week, we have migrated our wicket-implemented WebApp to
PortletApp, asuring there are no compilations errors, and everything
seems to go right.
Now we need to pack
